Every time we sent a warner to a community, the leaders of that community said, “We reject the message you are sent with.”

They also said, “We are more powerful, with more money and children, and we will not be punished.”

Say, “My Lord is the One who controls all provisions; He grants the provisions to whomever He wills, or reduces them, but most people do not know.”

It is not your money or your children that bring you closer to us. Only those who believe and lead a righteous life will receive the reward for their works, multiplied manifold. In the abode of Paradise they will live in perfect peace.

Dear Friends,

We, humans, are getting transgressed, when we feel to be needless.

But we should pay attention that we are a created entity and we never can be needless!

We need to eat, we need to drink, we need to be safe, we need to sleep!

If we have some amount of money today that is not mean that we are needless.

We all should know any amount of money cannot change us from a needy human to something else.

Any amount of money or power may disapear today ro tomorrow. Our health may disapear tomorrow.

For what reason we can be proud? We only should take place somewhere near to the Lord of universe.

He is the only entity that we can count on. And he is the entity that grants the provisions of every creature in the world.

Sepehr Mohamadi

P.S. Saddam, The Iraqi Dictator is just a sample. George W Bush maybe another sample in the future!

Is it not time for those who believed to open up their hearts for GOD’s message, and the truth that is revealed? They should not be like the followers of previous scriptures whose hearts became hardened with time and, consequently, many of them turned wicked.

[Bible-Proverbs 28:14]

Blessed is the man who always fears the Lord, but he who hardens his heart falls into trouble.

Dear Friends,

We are humans!

It’s in our humanity to be happy about believes we have and to be conservative about the new truthes that we face with.

But we should always be aware about this.

Our eyes always should be open for new truthes from wherever it comes.

We should be open to any truth.

If it’s a poor man in a road that claims that or a rich.A scientist or an ordinary school student. An Iranian claims that or an Afghan or American. A muslim claims that or a christian or Jewish or even atheist!

Our heart should be open to any new truthes that revealed to us.

And if we don’t do that? What happening to us?

Our hearts are become hardened and after a while we are turning wicked.

I hope that all of humans that read these statements are always to be open about any new truthes that revealed to them and don’t let theire hearts to be hardened.

I hope that diplomacy doors open once again, even with President A.(Ahmadinejad) and President B.(Bush) irrational governments!!

Sepehr Mohamadi

—————————

by NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF

Sunday, April 29, 2007

In May 2003, Iran sent a secret proposal to the U.S. for settling our mutual disputes in a “grand bargain.”

It is an astonishing document, for it tries to address a range of U.S. concerns about nuclear weapons, terrorism and Iraq. I’ve placed it and related documents (including multiple drafts of it) on my Blog,Www.nytimes.com/ontheground.

Hard-liners in the Bush administration killed discussions of a deal, and interviews with key players suggest that was an appalling mistake. There was a real hope for peace; now there is a real danger of war.

Scattered reports of the Iranian proposal have emerged previously, but if you read the full documentary record you’ll see that what the hard-liners killed wasn’t just one faxed Iranian proposal but an entire peace process.

The record indicates that officials from the repressive, duplicitous government of Iran pursued peace more energetically and diplomatically than senior Bush administration officials – which makes me ache for my country.

The process began with Afghanistan in 2001-2. Iran and the U.S., both opponents of the Taliban, cooperated closely in stabilizing Afghanistan and providing aid, and unofficial “track two” processes grew to explore opportunities for improved relations.

On the U.S. side, track two involved well-connected former U.S. ambassadors, including Thomas Pickering, Frank Wisner and Nicholas Platt. The Iranian ambassador to the U.N., Javad Zarif, was a central player, as was an Iranian-American professor at Rutgers, Hooshang Amirahmadi, who heads a friendship group called the American Iranian Council.

At a dinner the council sponsored for its board at Ambassador Zarif’s homein September 2002, the group met Iran’s foreign minister, Kamal Kharrazi. According to the notes of Professor Amirahmadi, the foreign minister told the group, “Yes, we are ready to normalize relations,” provided the U.S. made the first move.

This was shaping into a historic opportunity to heal U.S.-Iranian relations,and the track two participants discussed further steps, including joint U.S.-Iranian cooperation against Saddam Hussein. The State Department and National Security Council were fully briefed, and in 2003 Ambassador Zarif met with two U.S. officials, Ryan Crocker and Zalmay Khalilzad, in a series of meetings in Paris and Geneva.

Encouraged, Iran transmitted its “grand bargain” proposals to the U.S. One version was apparently a paraphrase by the Swiss ambassador in Tehran; that was published this year in The Washington Post.

But Iran also sent its own master text of the proposal to the State Department and, through an intermediary, to the White House. I’ve also posted that document, which Iran regards as the definitive one.

In the master document, Iran talks about ensuring “full transparency” and other measures to assure the U.S. that it will not develop nuclear weapons. Iran offers “active Iranian support for Iraqi stabilization.” Iran also contemplates an end to “any material support to Palestinian opposition groups” while pressuring Hamas “to stop violent actions against civilians within” Israel (though not the occupied territories). Iran would support thetransition of Hezbollah to be a “mere political organization within Lebanon” and endorse the Saudi initiative calling for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Iran also demanded a lot,including “mutual respect,” abolition of sanctions, access to peaceful nuclear technology and a U.S. statement that Iran did not belong in the “axis of evil.” Many crucial issues, including verification of Iran’s nuclear program, needed to be hammered out. It’s not clear to me that a grand bargain was reachable, but it was definitely worth pursuing -and still is today.

Instead, Bush administration hard-liners aborted the process. Another round of talks had been scheduled for Geneva, and Ambassador Zarif showed up – but not the U.S. side. That undermined Iranian moderates.

A U.S.-Iranian rapprochement could have saved lives in Iraq, isolated Palestinian terrorists and encouraged civil society groups in Iran. But instead the U.S. hard-liners chose to hammer plowshares into swords.